Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences Education, Vol. 21, No. 1, Spring/Summer, 2003
SINGLE MOTHERS: THE IMPACT OF WORK ON
HOME AND THE IMPACT OF HOME ON WORK
Lenore Rasmussen Robbins
Utah State University
Joan R. McFadden
Ball State University
The purpose of this study was to assess the relationships between
family/home satisfaction and job satisfaction of single working mothers with at
least one child under the age of 18 living at home. The principal objectives were
to identify the stressful situations in the lives of working single mothers and the
factors that contributed to home satisfaction and work satisfaction. Data were
gathered by self-report questionnaire from single working mothers. Factor
analysis was used to reduce data into home and work satisfaction factors. These
factors were then analyzed by multiple regression to determine the variance
explained. Using stepwise multiple regression the following three factors
predicted both satisfaction with home life and satisfaction with work 1) family
interaction, 2) income, housing, and health, and 3) family diet and money
management. Two additional factors, 1) time commitments and 2) family and
community support, can predict satisfaction with work. The work factors that
predicted home life satisfaction were 1) work schedule, 2) work environment, and
3) salary and advancement. Work factors that predict satisfaction with work
were 1) breaks and control, 2) schedule and salary, and 3) commuting and friends
at work. Working single mothers identified single parenting, financial problems,
major changes in work or family, and problems with children as the situations
causing stress in their lives. Using analysis of variance a statistically significant
relationship was found with income and 1) education, 2) perception of enough
income, 3) satisfaction with home life, and 4) work satisfaction.
Balancing work and family roles has become a key personal and family issue for
American society (Dubeck, 1998; Burge & Culver, 1989). Employers and family studies
specialists find that the changing American family structure is a major source of stress and role
strain in both the work place and the home.
The literature indicates that some of the most significant differences between traditional
two-parent families and single-parent families are that the latter experience reduced income
and/or poverty, lack of a support system, lowered self-esteem, reduced personal satisfaction, and
increased time pressures (Besharov, 1992; McLanahan & Booth, 1989; Richards, 1989).
As an individual attempts to balance work and family, role strain, conflict and stress
often result. Voydanoff and Donnelly (1989) conceptualized role strain as the individuals
appraisal of the level of conflicts between roles and of the degree of experienced from attempting
to meet multiple role demands.
Consequences to the children of single parent families included less support, greater high
school dropout, less parental attention and supervision at home, and less money for their needs.
1
Work is the cause of conflict and many and various types of stress among single working
mothers. It is associated with long, irregular, rigid working hours, travel away from home, and
"spillover" of fatigue, preoccupation, and irritability from work to family and family to work
(Pleck, 1985).
This study focuses on the single mother family. Evidence shows that these families face
a greater variety of hardships (stressors) than do the two-parent families (Parcel, 1998;
McLanahan & Booth, 1989; Quinn & Allen, 1989; Richards, 1989; Burden, 1986; Rubin, 1976).
Both work and family are valued in American society. Questions of how these single mothers
perceived work demands influencing their family and family demands influencing work have
been addressed. This study has examined how conflicting demands have caused stress, whether
this stress is exacerbated by the exhausting lives the single parent leads or is simply a matter of
stress from the conflict between work and family demands.
Danes (1998) studied role satisfaction in farm women. She investigated the possibility
that one of two conflicting theories, role scarcity or role enhancement was at work in this
sample:
The role scarcity model posits that people do not have enough energy
to fulfill role obligations; thus, it implies that the more roles one accumulates,
the greater the probability of exhausting one’s supply of time and energy and
of confronting conflicting obligations. The role enhancement theory on the
other hand posits that multiple role involvement can be energy generating; it
assumes that people find energy for that to which they are highly committed
and they often feel more energetic after doing those activities. (pp.403)
After this investigation, Danes (1998) determined that using a measure of well being that
included satisfaction was more appropriate than either of the role theories she studied.
Changes in Family Structure
The traditional American family with a working husband, a homemaker wife, and two or
more children made up only 7% of the nation's families in the 90’s (Duxbury & Higgins, 1991).
While single parent families comprised 11 percent of American families in 1970, this proportion
increased to 25.7 percent by 1984 (Norton & Glick, 1986) and 26.6 % in 1994 (Blau, Ferber &
Winkler, 1998). Another way to assess the increase in single parent families in the U.S. is to
consider that one of every 3.8 families with children under 18 years of age in 1998 was a single
parent family (March census 1998). This was up from five in every family in 1984 and from one
of every ten families in 1970 (Norton & Glick, 1986).
A study at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities based on Census data shows the
average incomes of the poorest 20 percent of female-headed families with children fell from
1995 to 1997 despite continued economic growth in America (Primus, 1999). According to
Schuchardt and Guadagno (1991), 8% of all two-parent families in the U.S. are living in poverty
compared to 40% of the white single-mother families who are living in poverty. In Utah
between 1980 and 1990, the number of female-headed families with children increased by 38%
and the number in poverty increased to over 50% (Report To The Governor; Poverty in Utah,
1991). Since 1970, the number of single-parent families has increased from 13% of the 29.6
million total families to 34.7% in 1990 (U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census,
1990). These figures indicate that single-parent families have almost tripled in number from
2
1970 to 1990. Of the 8.6 million single-parent families with children under age 18 in 1989, 79%
were maintained by women and 21% were maintained by men (U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development and U.S. Department of Commerce Current Housing Report, 1992). The
importance of employment becomes evident. Problems single-parents experience, in association
with having to go to work, include the lack of support in managing the home and children
(Burden, 1986). Single parents are constantly pressed for time. Work, shopping, cooking, and
housekeeping are fixed time consumers, leaving nurturing, emotional support, and cognitive
stimulation to suffer by default. (Garrett, Ng’andu, & Ferron, 1994).
Family Satisfaction and Work Performance
The need to examine the effects of home on work as well as to study the many complex
relationships among elements of work and the family is now recognized. Renshaw (1976) was
one of the first to document the interactive nature of work and family. His findings
demonstrated a strong relationship between a satisfying family life and high levels of job
satisfaction. According to Duxbury and Higgins (1991) the concern for work-family conflict as
a source of stress has been correlated with the following dysfunctional negative consequences:
increased health risks, poorer performance of the parenting role, decreased productivity,
tardiness, absenteeism, turnover, poor morale, reduced life satisfaction, and lower mental health.
Holtzman and Glass (1999) found that declines in job satisfaction routinely accompany
the birth of a child. Having an intellectually engaging and challenging job and higher wages
increased job satisfaction as did the flexibility to alter one's schedule and having a supervisor
support.
Conversely, Hanson and Sloane (1992) found that young children had no effect on the
job satisfaction of men and women workers regardless of time period, work status, or marital
status. They found this to be true for women working in the labor market as well as in the home.
They explain that perhaps working women with young children do experience role conflicts, but
they also derive satisfaction from their work.
Single-parent mothers were found by Burden (1986) to suffer the most strain between
family life satisfaction and job satisfaction. London (1996) found, as did McLanahan, & Booth
in 1998 that his population of single mothers had reduced chances of completing school,
decreased opportunities for marriage, and increased risks that public assistance will be needed to
maintain the economic viability of the family. Two important domains of existence, the family
and the workplace, come into conflict as single mothers struggle to live well in both areas.
Family life may make demands on work that the work role must accommodate, just as work may
require adjustments in family life (Dubeck, 1998, Felstehausen et al., 1986). The literature
clearly implicates the reciprocal influence of the two roles.
Reducing Stress and Education
People have less stress in their lives, both at home and at work when they have the skills
necessary to put balance in their lives. In favorable circumstances, adolescents acquire critical
adaptive skills in the family, among friends, and in the neighborhood but most will need added
skills gained through systematic instruction and practice in the classroom. Teaching skills in the
areas of time and finance management, health and nutrition, parenting and family relations, job
preparedness, decision making, and coping strategies would help children acquire the
knowledge, ability, and attitudes necessary for success in life.
3
Felstehausen and Couch (1989) developed a model for linking research to practice. The
model emerged from data collected from teachers who indicated if and where they included
work and family issues in the secondary curriculum. Work and family concepts were most likely
to be included in 1) family relations and 2) parenting and child development classes.
The results of a follow-up to two major work and family satisfaction surveys were used
by Felstehausen, Couch, and Wragg (1993) as the basis of a curriculum to teach life skills to
adolescents. They defined life-skills as the skills needed to be a healthy and productive member
of the community. These skills enable the adolescent to become a self-sufficient and productive
citizen. A single parent mother who has learned these skills as an adolescent will be better able
to cope with the rigors of her new role in life.
Method
The target population for this study was the single working mothers living in Iron
County, Utah, with at least one child under the age of 18 living at home. Effort was made to
identify these individuals through churches, government and other family social services
agencies, and University departments working with single women. An invitation to respond was
included in the local newspaper and names were volunteered by family, neighbors, friends, and
business associates.
The data were gathered by a self-report instrument developed at Texas Tech University
(Felstehausen et al., 1986). Using the pilot data, a reliability of .95 to .98 was established for the
instrument (Felstehausen et al.,1986). Reliability was calculated using Cronback’s Coefficients
Alphas.
This instrument included family and work satisfaction scales and inventories and is
conceptually grouped into four major sections: personal and family data, stress factors, work
hours and scheduling (labeled work factors), and conditions relating to work and family
environments (labeled home and family factors). The following questions guided this study in
assessing relationships between family/home satisfaction and job satisfaction in single mother
families: 1) What are the stressful situations in the lives of working single mothers? 2) How
stressful is the home life of working single mothers? 3) What are the home and family factors
that contribute to home satisfaction of working single mothers? 4) What are the home and family
factors that contribute to work satisfaction of working single mothers? 5) How satisfied are
working single mothers with their home life? 6) What are the work factors that contribute to
satisfaction with work of working single mothers? 7) What are the work factors that contribute to
the satisfaction of home life of the working single mothers?
The self-report format includes a semantic differential scale after each item. For
example, if the respondent answered “yes, the situation caused stress” the amount of stress was
indicated on a Likert scale from 1 to 7 where 1 equaled "not stressful at all" and 7 equaled "very
stressful."
In addition to individual factors, respondents were asked to give an overall rating of
satisfaction with their home and family life and an overall satisfaction rating with their work.
Likewise, they were asked to report the overall effect of their work on the quality of their home
life. Finally, a global question ("How difficult is it for you to combine work and family
responsibilities?"), is included as a summary item. Respondents replied on a Likert-type scale
from 1 to 7 where 1 equaled "not difficult" and 7 equaled "very difficult."
The data were analyzed to provide frequency counts and percentages to describe the
population. Factor analysis was used to reduce data into three or four underlying home
4
satisfaction and work satisfaction factors that were analyzed to determine the variables that were
highly correlated. These new factors were entered into a multiple regression to determine the
variance explained by the factors (treated as independent variables). A stepwise regression
procedure was used in order to determine the linear combination of independent variables that
will best predict work and home satisfaction. Analysis of variance identified the significance
and Spearman correlation coefficient established the strength of the correlation.
Findings
Since a random sample was not practical, a purposive sample of single working mothers
with at least one child under the age of 18 living at home was used (Vogt, 1993). A total of 59
persons responded to the 73 survey’s sent out making it an acceptable return rate of 80%. The
profile of the respondents included 3.4% minority women. All respondents had at least a high
school education with 49% having college degrees.
The average number of children per family in this study was 2.3, with the range being
from 1 to 9. The average family annual income was between $10,000 to $15,000. The lower
amount is just below the 1998 poverty level of $10,915 (Poverty in Utah 1998). This level has
only increased by $1,219 from the 1987 poverty level of $9,696. When respondents were asked
to indicate their perception of the adequacy of their income, 31% said they could only meet
necessities and 42% said their income allowed them to afford more than just necessities. The
remaining 27% reported that their incomes were not at all adequate.
The respondents reported the hours they worked each week ranged from 3-77. The mean
hours worked was 33 hours. The average age of the respondents was 42 years. Age ranged from
21 to 53. Working single mothers identified (in order of most frequent response) single
parenting, financial problems, major changes in work or family, and problems with children as
the situations that were causing stress in their lives.
Factor Analysis
Factor analyses were conducted on 28 home and family variables and 22 work variables
to identify clusters of variables that were related to home satisfaction and work satisfaction. The
analyses in this study determined that the following six home and family factors were related to
satisfaction with home life (listed in order of variance explained) (see Table 1):
1.
family interaction;
2.
time commitments;
3.
health, housing, and income;
4.
family support;
5.
family diet and money management; and
6.
community support.
Home and family factors related to satisfaction with work were (listed in order of variance
explained) (See Table 1):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
family interaction;
housing, health, and income;
time commitments;
family and community support;
family diet and money management;
5
6.
7.
child care and family drug and alcohol abuse; and
family communication.
Table 1
Factors that Influence Satisfaction with Home and Work
Satisfaction with
Factors
Home
**
Home and Family
Family Interaction
*1
24.8%
Time Commitments
2
9.8%
Health, Housing and Income
3
8.7%
Family Support
4
6.5%
Family Diet and Money Mgt
5
6.0%
Community Support
6
5.5%
Child Care
Family Communication
Accumulative % Variance
explained
61.3%
Satisfaction with
Work
**
1
3
2
4a
5
4b
6
7
31.1%
8.2%
9.0%
7.1%
6.1%
5.1%
4.0%
70.6%
*Numbers indicate order of variance explained
**Percent of variance explained
Listed, in order of the variance explained, are the work factors that were related to
satisfaction with home life (see Table 2 ):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
work environment;
salary and advancement;
breaks and parking;
benefits and security;
commuting and friends at work; and
work schedule.
Work factors related to satisfaction with work were identified as (listed in order of
variance explained) (See Table 2):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
work environment;
schedule and salary;
break and control;
commuting and friends at work;
benefits and security; and
work conditions.
6
Table 2
Factors that Influence Satisfaction with Home and Work
Satisfaction with
Factors
Home
**
Work
Work Environment
*1
37.3%
Salary
2
9.0%
Breaks
3
7.9%
Benefits and Security
4
6.3%
Commuting and Friends at Work
5
4.9%
Work Conditions
Work Schedule
6
4.6%
Accumulative % Variance
explained
70.0%
Satisfaction with
Work
**
1
2a
3
5
4
6
2b
38.5%
10.2%
7.2%
4.8%
6.6%
4.6%
71.9%
*Numbers indicate order of variance explained
**Percent of variance explained
Stepwise Multiple Regression
A subsequent series of regression analyses were conducted to find which of the new
factors could predict home life satisfaction and work satisfaction. Findings indicate that home
and family factors accounted for 63% of the variance (R2=.63) in predicting satisfaction with
home life. They were:
Factors
1.
family interaction;
2.
income, housing, and health; and
3.
family diet and money management.
*<p.05 **p< .01
β
.63
.42
.24
t
7.64
5.05
2.92
p value
.00**
.00**
.01**
Home and family factors that entered the regression equation and explained 38%
(R2=.38) of the variance in predicting satisfaction with work were:
Factors
1.
family interaction;
2.
time commitments;
3.
housing, health, and income;
4.
family and community support; and
5.
family diet and money management.
*<p.05 **p< .01
β
.37
-.26
.26
.25
t
3.37
-2.43
2.37
2.35
2.02
p value
.00**
.02*
.02*
.02*
.05
Forty-two percent of the variance (R2 = .42) in satisfaction with home life could be
accounted for in the following work factors:
7
β
.40
.38
.34
Factors
1.
work schedule;
2.
work environment; and
3.
salary and advancement.
*<p.05 **p< .01
t
3.82
3.69
3.28
p value
.00**
.00**
.00**
The work factors that could explain 40% of the variance (R2 = .40) in predicting
satisfaction with work were:
Factors
1.
breaks and control;
2.
schedule and salary; and
3.
commuting and friends at work.
*<p.05 **p< .01
β
.38
.36
.35
t
3.6
3.43
3.29
p value
.00**
.00**
.00**
Analysis of Variance and Spearman's Correlation Coefficient
Spearman correlation, which shows the degree of monotonic relationship between two
variables that are arranged in rank order, was conducted because the variables were measured
using a Likert scale. A statistically significant relationship was found with income and 1)
education (F=19.72, df=9, p< .008), 2) perception of enough income (F=24.67, df=6, p< .000),
3) satisfaction with home life (F=18.50, df=15, p< .022), and 4) work satisfaction (F=27.86,
df=18, p< .006). The research indicated a significant relationship (at .02 or above) between
income and four factors: education, perception of enough income, satisfaction with home life,
and work satisfaction.
Conclusions
Consistent with other research, findings, this study suggest that income is correlated with
education and perception of enough income to meet family needs. Income is also correlated with
satisfaction with home life and work satisfaction. Implications of this study point to the
importance of making educational programs available for lower income and the lesser educated,
single working mothers. These programs should include parenting and employment skills, time
and financial management, health and nutritional information, and ways to cope with change.
The study reinforces the importance of friends at work and family interactions. It would be
important to make socializing with peers a strong component of these educational programs.
These findings would indicate a need to begin vocational classes in the early years in high school
for at-risk youth or pregnant unmarried teen women.
Educators, especially those concerned with family relations and/or family resource
management, can help guide families to improve current job skills or develop new skills aimed at
securing better-paying jobs. Policy makers and educators need to become cognitive of the
magnitude of the problem and aware that intervention through education is less expensive than
teen pregnancy and long-term public assistance. Findings in this study are consistent with
previous studies regarding the importance of intervention through education (Felstehausen,
Couch, and Wragg, 1993; Schuchardt & Guadagno, 1991).
8
References
Besharov, D. J. (1992, September/October). Not all single mothers are created equal. The
American Enterprise, 13-17
Blau, F.D., Ferber, M.A., & Winkler, A.E. (1998). The economics of women, men, and work.
Prentice Hall: NY.
Burden, D. S. (1986). Single parents and the work setting: The impact of multiple job and home
life responsibilities. Family Relations, 36, 37-43.
Burge, P. L., & Culver, S. M. (1989). The reciprocal relationship between work and home
satisfaction for home economics teachers. Home Economics Research Journal, 17(4),
337-350.
Danes, S. M. (1998). Multiple roles, balance between work and leisure, and satisfaction with
level of living. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 26(4), 401-424.
Dubeck, P.J. (1998). The need and challenge to better integrate work and family life in the
Twenty-first century. In Challenges for work and family in the twenty-first century. New
York: Aldine DeGruyter). (eds. Vannoy, Dubeck 1998)
Duxbury, L. E., & Higgins, C. A. (1991). Gender differences in work-family conflicts. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 76(1), 60-74.
Felstehausen, G., Glosson , L. R., & Couch, A. S. (1986). A study to determine the relationship
between the workplace and the home. Final report. Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech
University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 276-890).
Felstehausen, G., & Couch, S. (1989). Balancing work and family: Bridging the gap from
research to the secondary classroom. Journal of Vocational Home Economics Education,
7(2)67-80.
Felstehausen, G., & Couch, S., & Wragg, M. (1993). Building life skills for the changing family
and workplace. Journal of Vocational Home Economics Education, 11(1) 47-57.
Garrett, P., Ng’andu, N., & Ferron, J., (1994) Poverty experiences of young children and the
quality of their home environments. Child Development, 65,331-345
Hanson, S. L., & Slone, D. M. (1992). Young children and job satisfaction. Journal of Marriage
and the Family, 54(Nov 1992): 799-811.
Holtzman, M. & Glass, J. (1999) Explaining changes in mothers' job satisfaction following
childbirth. Work and Occupations, 26(3) 365-404.
London, R.A. (1996). The difference between divorced and never married mothers’
participation in the Aid to Families with Dependent children program. Journal of Family
Issues, 17(2), 7-22.
McLanahan, S. & Booth, K.(1989). Mother-only families: Problems, prospects, and politics.
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 557-580.
Norton, A. J., & Glick, P.C. (1986). One parent families: A social and economic profile, Family
Relations, 35, 9-17.
9
Parcel, T.L. (1998). Working mothers, welfare mothers: Implications for children in the twentyfirst century. In D. Vannoy & P.J. Dubeck (eds.). Challenges for work and family in the
twenty-first century. pp. 127). New York: Aldine DeGruyter.
Pleck, J. (1985). Working wives/working husbands. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Poverty in Utah (1993) Report to the Governor, State Community Services Offices.
Primus, W. (1999). (Lead author) “The initial impacts of welfare reform on the economic wellbeing of single mother families,” A study conducted by the Center on Budget and Policy
Priorities and based on Census data. Internet released date August 22, 1999.
www.cbpp.org/8-22-99wel.htm
Quinn, P., & Allen, K. R. (1989). Facing challenges and making compromises: How single
mothers endure. Family Relations, 38, 390-395.
Renshaw, J. R. (1976). An exploration of the dynamics of the overlapping world of work and
family. Family Process, 15, 143-165.
Richards, L. N. (1989). The precarious survival and hard-won satisfactions of white singleparent families. Family Relations, 38, 396-403.
Rubin, L. B. (1976). Worlds of pain/life in the working-class family. New York: Basics Books,
Inc.
Schuchardt, J., & Guadagno, M. A. N., (1991). A comparison of lower middle income twoparent and single-mother families. Home Economics Review, 4(2), 9-17.
U.S. Bureau of the Census (1998). Internet Released date Dec 11, 1998.
www.census.gov/population/socdemo/hh-fam/98pplatxt. Table A. Households by type
and selected characteristic: 1998.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census (1990). Poverty in the United States:
(Current Population Reports Consumer Income Series P-60, No. 175). Washington, DC:
U.S. Government Printing Office.
Vannoy J.M. & Dubeck, P.J. (eds.1998) Challenges for work and family in the twenty-first
century. NY: Aldine DeGruyter).
Vogt, W. P., (1993). Dictionary of Statistics and Methodology: a non-technical guide for the
social sciences. CA: Sage.
Voydanoff, P., & Donnelly, B. W., (1989). Work and family roles and psychological distress.
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 923-932.
About the Authors
Lenore Rasmussen Robbins, PhD, is an Extension Educator at Utah State University,
Logan, Utah. Joan R. McFadden, PhD, is a Professor of Family and Consumer Sciences
Education at Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana.
10